Excessive noise resulting from impacting and chattering, clattering gear teeth has been associated with gear systems for many years. In general terms, “gear rattle” refers to the noise phenomenon wherein gear teeth of adjacent gears come out of mesh and are rapidly forced back into mesh by a backside tooth impact, generating an audible noise. Not only can loud sounds from gear rattle make a work environment uncomfortable, the impacts between gear teeth and shocks through gear systems can result in premature wear and undue stress on components of the system. Moreover, where a given gear rattles against a meshing gear partner rather than smoothly transmitting torque, energy can be wasted in a manner familiar to those skilled in the gear-related arts.
In the context of an internal combustion engine, it is common to utilize a series of gears or a “geartrain” to power certain engine components, and to provide for a desired relative timing between certain of the gears. In one example, a crank gear, rotated by the engine crankshaft, is rotatably linked with a cam gear, in turn coupled with one or more cams of the engine. One or more gears may be operably disposed between the crank and cam gears to maintain a relative timing between the two such that certain cam-actuated engine functions such as valve opening/closing and fuel injection will reliably take place at a desired time relative to engine crank angle.
On certain engines, dynamic activity of the crank and cam gears can be substantial, imparting significant torques through the geartrain during operation. It is thus common for each of the crank and cam gears to experience impulsive accelerations and decelerations during engine operation. Cylinder firing applies a torque to the crankshaft and hence crank gear, whereas fuel injection tends to apply a torque to the camshaft and, hence, cam gear. In some engine systems, the rotational speed of the cam shaft may temporarily slow down hundreds of revolutions per minute from its average rotational speed due to force of mechanically actuated fuel injections. Torque impulses from the camshaft and crankshaft may affect the geartrain independently from one another, or they may be additive or subtractive. Cylinder firing, fuel injection and other events tend to take place in relatively rapid succession, thus it will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art that the dynamic behavior of the geartrain under such conditions may be quite complex. Energy transfer through a relatively stiff geartrain with significant component inertias and backlash, or the separation of adjacent gear teeth, may be a series of very dynamic events with significant peak torque magnification, especially when large inertias from different gears collide with different velocities. In some instances, for example where a timing gear between the crank and cam gears, known in the art as an “idler gear,” experiences torque impulses from either or both of the cam and crank gears, it may be induced to clatter intensely back and forth before settling back to relatively smooth operation. The front geartrain may be the most significant noise producing part of an engine system.
The above problems have tended to be particularly acute in heavy duty compression ignition engines, as they tend to experience gear rattle problems over a greater range of operating conditions than lighter duty and/or spark ignited engines. Moreover, the desire to reduce certain gaseous emissions in compression ignition engines has been addressed with higher peak cylinder pressures and higher injection pressures, resulting in even greater impulsive loading in the engine geartrain.
In addition to the obvious benefits of reducing wear and stress on the machine, and ameliorating the waste of energy, certain jurisdictions have paid increasing attention to geartrain noise levels in working machinery. A host of reasons thus exist for addressing excessive noise production in gear systems. As stated above, problems associated with excessive gear noise have been recognized for many years. Engineers have thus sought to address such noise problems by a variety of means, one of which has been to increase the mass moment of inertia of the geartrain and associated components to reduce its susceptibility to torque related disturbances. This has been achieved, for example, by increasing the mass of the gears themselves, and/or by incorporating pendulums to the cam and crank shafts. Adding mass to the engine and/or geartrain components has obvious drawbacks, including increasing the overall weight, size and cost of the system. Another approach has been to introduce compliance into the geartrain.
In general terms, compliant gears provide reduced stiffness, or slack, in the geartrain, allowing one or more of the gears to attenuate its response to impulsive loads. Where a particular gear might otherwise be sharply accelerated or decelerated due to a torque impulse, compliance will allow the gear to more gradually adjust its rotation to accommodate the impulsive load. Compliant gears can thus allow adjacent gears to stay in mesh more of the time than non-compliant systems, reducing undue wear, mechanical strain and audible noise.
In one compliant gear design, “scissors gears” consisting of two closely adjacent coaxial gears having some rotational compliance are used to transmit torque or maintain timing between or among other gears. In a typical design, a front gear member of a scissors gear set meshes with a first gear, and a back gear member of the scissors gear set meshes with a second gear. Gear teeth of the respective front and back gear members of the scissors gears are movable relative to one another such that pairs of adjacent gear teeth behave in manner considered similar to the operation of a pair of scissors, hence the name. While such a design, introducing rotational compliance between the front and back gears, may have certain benefits, the systems tend to be quite expensive and complex.
Another gear design using rotational compliance is known from U.S. Pat. No. 5,170,676 to Matouka et al. (hereafter “Matouka”). Matouka illustrates a torque limiter for use in a geartrain which allows relative motion, i.e. rotational compliance, between a hub and gear ring when a certain torque value on the gear is exceeded. Matouka utilizes a spring whose spring force must be overcome before the gear ring and hub are able to rotationally slip from one relative position to another. While Matouka is applicable in some systems the design is not without drawbacks.
The present disclosure is directed to one or more of the problems or shortcomings set forth above.